Okay, it is 707, and I'm calling to order the Monday, July 20th, 2026 meeting of the City of San Landro City Council.

My apologies for our tardiness as our closed session ran just a little bit long.

At this point in time, I will lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Please join me if you can.

I pledge allegiance to the flags of America.

Madam Clerk, would you please take the role to assess quorum?

Council member Fred Simon is absent.

Council member Victor Aguilar.

Present.

Council Member Sue Bone.

Present.

Councilmember Dylan Bolt.

Present.

Present.

And Mayor Gonzalez.

Present.

The City of St.

Helena conducts orderly meetings to fulfill its mandate.

Discriminatory statements for conduct that would potentially violate the Federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 and/or the California Fair Employment and Housing Act.

If you would like to make a public comment during the meeting, you can do so in person or via Zoom.

If you are present at the meeting, please complete a speaker card and submit it to the city clerk before the item is presented.

Then wait for public comment on that item to be called.

If you wish to participate in public comment via Zoom, you can use the raise your hand tool when the item is called.

All raised hands outside of public comment will be lowered to avoid confusion.

Once public comment is opened, hands may be raised to speak.

So a couple of uh other announcements.

Today we do have Chris Cogatello here as our acting city attorney.

And for those that were not present at our work session meeting on July 13th, 2026, I do want to let the public know that we did adjourn that meeting in honor and memory of our uh former Alameda County Supervisor Scott Haggerty, and we observed a moment of silence.

We did meet in closed session.

There was ample discussion, deliberation, but there was no reportable action that was taken.

We do not have recognitions on today's agenda, but we will move on to the consent calendar.

And so what I'd like to see if there are any items on the consent calendar that council members would like to pull for additional discussion.

Councilmember Bolt.

Yes, I'd like to pull item five E.

Okay, so five E is being pulled.

Councilmember, and I'm assuming that's it.

Correct.

Okay.

And then Vice Mayor, please.

Um, I'd like to pull item five H, please.

Was that Alpha A?

Or H.

Oh, there it is.

Uh H is in hearing.

Thank you.

Councilmember Victor Aguilar.

Uh thank you, Mayor.

I'd like to move the consent calendar with the exception of 5E and 5H.

Okay, just as a matter of clarification, I will be pulling item 5G.

Would you mind amending your motion accordingly?

Yes.

Okay, so we do have a motion by Councilmember Aguilar to move the consent calendar with the exception of 5E, 5G, 5H.

Do I have a second on that?

Um I will second it, but I Councilmember.

I will second it, but I think that um Vice Mayor has a statement first before our I have to second it.

Perfect.

Vice Mayor.

Yeah, I apologize.

I I meant 5G, not 5H.

There was so I'm agreeing with you, Mayor.

No problem.

So then I will go back to the motion maker, Councilmember Victor Aguilar.

So Councilmember Victor Aguilar, are you fine with the suggested update?

Namely that we approve the consent calendar with items 5E and 5G removed.

Just for the record again, the future.

Yes, yes.

And then Councilmember Bowen, just to clarify, is that the motion that you're seconding?

Yes.

Okay.

Councilmember Bolt, did you have something in addition to that?

No.

Thank you very much.

So we've got a motion from Councilmember Victor Aguilar with a second from Councilmember Bowen to move the entire consent calendar with the exception of 5E and 5G.

At this point in time, we will take public comment on the consent calendar.

Mayor, we have received one comment card for the consent calendar that doesn't pertain to the items that were just removed.

And there are current I'm sorry, that does or does not.

Let me restate.

Okay.

Um our general process is to take all consent calendar comment at one point in time.

So we will continue to follow that process.

Um, but let's start with the one that is not uh on an item that's been removed yet, then we'll move into the others.

How many hands do we have raised online?

And there are three hands raised online.

Okay, we have a total of how many cards in your hand?

Seven.

Seven.

Okay, thank you.

Let's proceed with our standard of two minutes.

Our first in-person speakers are Jeff Krop, followed by Anne, followed by April.

Hello, Council.

Um, I'd like to comment on.

I'd like to comment on the crosstown corridor.

Um I question the wisdom of spending six million dollars on planning and design when with the frequency of how often I hear that roads are failed and not getting the money that they need, that that they're becoming more expensive by not getting the attention they they need.

And here we are putting six million dollars towards two roads that are in good condition with serviceable bike lanes.

Um to do what?

To make designs for isolating bike lanes at some fruit future date.

Um I don't think that this is a wise use of the money at this time.

It can be delayed, the work will be delayed.

That's obvious.

But here we are spending money on bikeways of major thoroughfares that are in good shape, already have bike lanes.

Um another place where that could be considered would be Estudillo Avenue, where they're talking about a two-way cycle track when there's um bikeways that are just off of the main fair that are designated bike routes that are not getting attention.

Um I can think there are quite a few designated bike routes that are red on our map of conditions of roads, and they're not getting attention.

The attention for the bicycle pedestrian safety thing is going to the most obvious thoroughfares, the most expensive places that need it the least.

I question the priorities that are being acted here.

Thank you.

Thank you.

The next three speakers are Anne, followed by April, followed by John Barski.

The Alameda County Transportation Commission has 200 million in available grants.

Applications are due July 27th.

The city is not applying for any of it to fix Lake Chabot Road, a vital fire evacuation route for the Bay of Vista neighborhood.

The city's own 2022 Kittleson report documented the fact that Benedict and Vista Grand Drives will be over capacity in the event of a wildfire.

Other major streets will be congested.

The timed evacuation study conducted by the WIGO startup associated with UC Berkeley recently concluded that in a best case scenario, it will take residents an hour or more to evacuate.

Without Lake Chabot Road, 100 to 400 of our most vulnerable residents will be exposed to deadly fire and toxic smoke.

If even one street is blocked, it will be much worse.

The city has known of this dangerous public safety situation since 2023.

Yes, there are funds to fix two of the four road issues, but the city does not plan to open the road once these are fixed, supposedly in 2027.

As we have been told by Alameda County Public Works, without a geotechnical report, the city can't assess the actual damage to the other two locations and cannot obtain actual repair costs to fix and reopen the road.

Without the actual cost, the city cannot apply for funding, which it could have done from ACTC in 2024 and again in 2026.

If the city can apply for grants for bike lanes, street lighting and emergency trail stabilization repairs, why will they not prioritize fixing a vital fire evacuation route?

This is a capital project that is long overdue.

Thank you.

Thank you.

The next three speakers are April, John Barski and Kat Wilman.

Good evening.

And you know, primarily on the weekend, and it was lovely to see people visiting the home and you know, um enjoying the garden in front of in front of the the casa.

So I was very dismayed and and and surprised when the um Casa Peralta got in into a state where it was closed, as I understand in 2019.

Um and it seems like the decision to fix it or you know what to do with it has just been postponed, postponed, postponed.

And meanwhile, there are um parts of the house which are falling into disrepair.

And my understanding is that there is now a proposal to have a company come in and re-evaluate what needs to be done.

And there was an evaluation done in 2016.

The current proposal for reevaluation redoes some of the things that were on that 2016, excuse me, 2016 proposal, and I think there's something like half a million dollars that they want to do it.

Um what I want to suggest is that while you're trying to decide, uh, I mean, the half a million dollars is just is just outlandish.

Um, but while you're trying to make a decision, could you please arrange to have the cost of Peralta?

Thank you.

Your time has elapsed.

Um thank you.

Your time has elapsed.

Please finish your sentence.

Yes.

So my suggestion is could you pick something like the windows and at least um have the money go to fix the windows to help save the house from further disrepair?

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

So I do want to clarify one thing that I just you can be seated.

Um the statement was made that we are uh postponing this item.

I just want to be clear for any future speakers what we've done by saying that we're pulling it from the consent calendar.

That means that instead of just approving it by a vote among 10 different items, 20 different items, that it's going to come apart separately for discussion in just a few minutes.

So we'll hear you guys.

We'll vote on the other items on the consent calendar, and then both items 5E and 5G will have their own periods for discussion.

So I don't want anyone to get up and walk away if that's why you're here.

So if we could proceed with our public comment, please.

Thank you.

The next three speakers are John Barski, Kat Wellman, and Art Johnson.

Thank you for the clarification.

Uh on 5G.

Uh, as someone who was a registered professional engineer in the state of California for over 30 years.

Excuse me, I have looked on the saga of Lake Shabot Road for the past two plus years with sadness and amazement.

Not only has virtually nothing been done to address the problem by the city, apparently nothing is planned to be done.

First, it was argued that the loss of that road would have no impact on the citizens.

Then a group of citizens spent their own money to conduct a study demonstrating the negative impact on the ability to evacuate during an emergency.

Still no action on the part of the city and its staff.

People have asked me to argue for the quick repair of Lake Chabot Road.

When you fix something, you have to determine the cause and extent of the problem.

That has to be assigned in this case to professional experts.

Failure to begin the investigation is equivalent to putting your head in the sand.

Thank you.

Thank you.

The next three speakers are Kat Wellman, Art Johnson, and Donald Pollard.

Good evening.

The City Council has stated that it wants Lake Shabot Road to be repaired and reopened to two-way traffic, but finding the funds to pay for the repairs has been the primary stumbling block.

So why is the city not applying for some of ACTC's 200 million dollar grant funding to fix Lake Shabot Road?

Fixing and reopening Lake Shabau Road strongly aligns with ACTC's funding priorities of safety, transportation and mobility, and community benefit and resilience.

First, safety.

Lake Shabot Road is a critical emergency evacuation route for nearly 4,000 Bayo Vista residents living in San Leandro's only high fire hazard severity zone.

The independent wee co timed evacuation study demonstrated that reopening the road would significantly improve evacuation times and could save the lives of 100 to 400 of our most vulnerable residents during a fast moving wildfire.

Two, transportation and mobility.

Reopening Lake Chabot Road restores an important connection between San Leandro and Castro Valley, reduces congestion currently running through steep residential streets in Bayo Vista, improves access for emergency responders, and restores needed redundancy to our transportation network.

Three, community benefit and resilience.

This project serves residents, first responders, businesses, and everyone who depends on a safe and reliable transportation in both San Leandro and Castor Valley.

It strengthens our community's resilience to wildfires and other emergencies.

This is exactly the type of regional project ACTC was created to support.

We have spent more than three years discussing why Lake Chabot Road matters.

This is an opportunity to pursue outside funding and demonstrate that reopening this critical roadway is a priority.

Please direct staff to submit an application for funding from ACTC before July 22nd.

Your time has elapsed.

The next two speakers are Art Johnson and Donald Pollard.

Hi, everybody.

Good evening.

My name is Art Johnson, uh, vice president of the San Leandro Historical Society.

Um speaking tonight on behalf of the Historical Society, myself, um, as a member of this community.

Um, and basically, we've started this campaign to save the CASA back in 2024.

Uh, there's a little bit of a timeline here, so I'll try to be brief as possible.

So 2016, as you all probably are aware of, there was an assessment done by ARG, uh, an extensive assessment.

And we offered as the historical society to renew that assessment, knowing that it was 10 years old for about $20,000 and gift that uh to the city.

Um it goes on from there, uh, essentially 14 months plus uh we are where we are today with now a new assessment, brand new assessment for basically half a million dollars.

And the unfortunate part, the concern for me and the historical society is that zero dollars are actually being spent on repairs.

And as anybody again knows, the longer a building goes in disrepair, the worse it gets, the more expensive it gets.

Want to be specific about why that number is hard to accept.

So we went through the 2016 report line by line.

And basically six of the nine uh major work items in the proposal, uh, background research, code, and accessible accessibility analysis, structural evaluation, and MEP review, and landscape assessment are the main cost uh estimates.

And all of those were done in 2016.

So, really, there's only three items here that are new.

Uh the geotechnical soil investigation, the hazardous materials testing, the exploratory demolition, which that line item worries me just a hair.

Um, but those are really the net new items.

And I just ask that the council uh basically doesn't improve this contract as scope, uh, direct staff to narrow it to a net new investigation work, soil, hazmat, and exploratory testing.

Send the cost of Peralta back to the facilities meeting to discuss gifting the property to a nonprofit.

Time has elapsed.

The last public speaker is Donald Pollard.

My name is Donald Pollard, uh San Leandro Historical Society Board Member.

And a resident of San Leandro for more than 50 years.

Um Casa would be an asset to San Leandro.

It's in the heart of the city.

Students could take field trips and really see a lot of history about Casa Peralta.

Also, making a public uh historical museum would benefit the surrounding community.

We need and should save the CASA.

Thank you for your time.

And that was way under thank you.

Mayor, there are no more comment cards from in the room.

Thank you.

So let's close public comment in person.

We'll move to public comment online.

Our first online speaker is Christopher Bammer.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

Um, I would like to speak about item five F.

So I'm a little concerned that all the council members, the mayor, the city manager, the city attorney, everybody wants to go ahead and just approve this consent calendar.

5F.

Is it for $5.7 million, or is it for $575,000?

That's a big difference.

That's a $5 million discrepancy.

And it's just a typo, but everybody has looked at it and everybody has approved it, and now it's on the motion for a vote.

So I want to pull $5F and have some discussion about what the actual cost of this is.

Because now that we're talking about the Casa Peralta, it made me think about 2016.

I was there on a field trip with my daughters for their school, and they were doing the inspection, and the entire house was open, the basement, all the floors, everything.

So I walked around and inspected the house myself, like I was one of the inspectors.

This house is not sable.

This is going to be millions and millions and millions of dollars wasted, right?

They had an account for this house.

The city has an account, the Casa Peralta, whatever they call it.

They used the money that was in that account a couple years ago to finish the new uh police station renovations, probably to buy some high dollar furniture or something.

I don't know.

Let's do an audit.

I want to know what kind of money we've taken from the Casa Peralta to spend on other things other than the Casa Peralta.

And also, I think we need to look at five F.

And you guys need to uh review your documents a little bit better.

I had some faith in this council, but with this five million dollar discrepancy, I want some answers and I want to talk about it.

I want to pull five F and I want you guys to read your documents better and make better decisions.

You should spend the money on the road that's damaged, not talking about fixing other roads for bike lanes.

I'll be back later with more.

Thank you, sir.

Your time is elapsed.

Our next online speaker is Douglas Spaulding.

Good evening, council members and San Leandro.

What a monsoonal weather pattern it is.

Happy El Nino.

Um, I I spend more and more time reading the consent calendar because I find I learn a lot about our city governance here.

After all, this is where the money is spent, and they say, you know, you put your money where your mouth is.

This is where priorities are determined.

I um I am uh happy to see several things on here that are worth certainly worthwhile the 120 some thousand dollars to building futures, very important.

Uh the almost a half a million for uh San Leandro uh Link Shuttle.

Great.

Uh even the nearly a million dollars for the to rebuild the bridge to uh to Bancroft, great.

But uh, you know, I find a lot of these consulting services really quite uh questionable.

And in that, I count among that five F.

So Chris Bammer, if I can clarify the 575,000 is on top of the 500 million.

So it's not a discrepancy, it's just to add the two numbers together.

But that's just for design.

There's not no construction goes that goes on there.

We're not really getting much bang for the buck there.

Uh I have the same problem with the 5e, there, the Casa Peralta.

7500,000 uh doesn't get us anything more than an assessment and an estimate.

It it's it's no, it's no repairs, it's no uh restoration.

Um I noticed, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.

I noticed that in 5L, the uh Marina Community Center has snug its way in.

I thought Casa Peralta Marina were a couple things the citizens were concerned about, and so they put them in the parcel tax, but now that that's not going forward now.

Maybe this is the the end around.

I'm I'm not sure that these two things are uh priorities in the public works priority list.

Um and the final thing I want to say, I I noticed there's another big ticket item that's covered by the MTC uh uh grant for 1.35 million.

I just want to know how it jives with the plans that are planning.

Thank you, sir.

Your time has elapsed.

The next online speaker is Imagine Gonzalez.

Good evening, City Council members, Mr.

Mayor and San Leandro friends.

My name is Imagine Gonzalez.

I am a former member of the San Leandro Historical Society, and I'm dialing in tonight on behalf of a building the city has now spent 10 years studying and no time repairing.

A decade ago in 2016, Architectural Resources Group professionally assessed the Casa Peralta property.

Seven years later, the San Leandro Historical Society and the caring members of this community launched the Save the Casa campaign in good faith and in partnership with city staff.

The historical society offered to pay out of its own pocket to have that assessment brought up to date by the same firm and much of the same team.

That offer was declined.

It had to go out to bid.

14 months have passed between this council's direction in May of last year and the contract before you tonight.

14 months, and the Casa is no better off for it.

What that process has produced is a $566,000 invoice.

More than half of the $1 million the city has set aside for repairing the casa for a second opinion that will not lay a single brick, catch a single roof, or save a single beam.

So tonight I ask you three things.

One, do not spend half of the Casa's money studying the CASA.

Two, return this matter to the facilities committee to explore gifting or returning the property to a steward who will preserve it.

And three, do preserve the building.

Its history and this community's connection to it.

Don't clear it for a park.

Thank you for your time and have a good evening.

Thank you.

The next online speaker is Angela.

Angela, you can unmute yourself.

Hi, can you hear me?

Yes.

We'll just keep it brief.

Please don't waste over half a million dollars and half the funds set aside for the cost of Peralta on a meaningless assessment.

It's been 15 months since the cost was discussed at a facilities meeting in May 2025, where this council asked staff to get real cost estimates for the project.

There's been no meaningful progress on restoring the house since then, despite the efforts of numerous concerned citizens, including our historical society to get the council to prioritize the house.

That money is much better spent toward any of the numerous projects that have already been identified in the 2016 assessment.

This entire situation is emblematic of the deep divide between the citizens and the government of this city and the deep distrust and lack of faith that the former has in the latter.

Please send the cost of back to be discussed at a facilities meeting to explore gifting the property back to the prior owner or to a nonprofit that will actually prioritize preserving the property, as was the original intent when it was given to the city, which the city has completely failed in accomplishing.

We want the cost of preserved.

We do not want it torn down to create a park, as Brian Simon proposed in one of the previous meetings.

Oakland's shameful failure to protect its historic homes, including the recent fires at the Peralta House in June and the Cameron Stanford House in April should be a cautionary tale, not one that San Leandro should seek to emulate.

And the house is saveable.

Please don't listen to people who are playing expert because they looked around during a field trip.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Mayor, there are no more hands raised online.

Okay, thank you.

Um do you have just a question?

Because right now we do have a motion, but there was, I think, one question that was really focused on an item that was not polled.

So I'd like to get a little bit of elaboration.

Uh so I will ask on behalf of the public commenter to Director Marquises.

There was a discussion about the approximately six million dollars that will be spent on engineering and design related to the crosstown corridors.

And if you could perhaps explore two pieces of that.

Thank you, Mayor.

Good evening, um, council, mayor, and members of the public.

My name is Sheila Marquises, Public Works Director.

Uh, the Cross Town Corridor Project has been um a long-running project that's been in study starting in 2020.

We received a planning grant to study uh protected bike lanes along both Bancroft Avenue from city limits to the north, Oakland and down to the county limits to the south, and Williams from um St.

Leandro Boulevard all the way to uh Neptune, Neptune Drive.

Uh the project has undergone um community outreach, and with that outreach, um, with the vision of the protected bike lanes along both corridors, we were able to submit grant applications for both um the federal and Alameda CTC.

So I believe that combined about four million dollars, a total for um enough to get us to um through the design.

So we have a combination of grant and local funding, and the five million dollars to um for the consultant includes the the project management, stakeholder and utility coordinations for all the required um coordination for both of those corridors.

So that includes utilities and also Union Pacific Railroad.

And that's also the development of the plan specs and estimates to get us to the complete bid package.

At that point, that also puts us in a very good position to request for additional grant funding for construction funds.

And then the magnitude, if you can just number of linear feet or miles or whatever metric, because again, it might feel like, oh, well, that's just you know a hundred yards, but can give us some sense of the scale.

Yes.

What comes to mind is three miles, but I'm gonna look to our city engineer if I have that number correct.

Um comes to mind the bottom of the thing.

That is approximately right given the distances that that are involved.

And again, to be clear, you have to relocate potentially things ranging from sewer access, electricity, access, lighting.

It's not even as simple as let's just put up some curbs to separate bikes.

Correct.

Okay.

Um are there any other questions related to that item?

Because that was a question that was raised by the public, and I just want to make sure that we had a little bit of information before we decide whether or not we want to also pull that item.

Councilmember Bowen.

Yes, thank you, Mayor.

Um can you clarify the first amount, the 5 million seven fifty-six one eighty versus approval amendments to the agreement up to a cumulative value of 575,618?

Yes.

Um I'm gonna hand that over to our city engineer to answer.

Um thank you.

Uh good evening, mayor and members of the council.

Jason E.

Mime, city engineer of public works department.

The $5,756,180 is the contract amount for the design of the project.

Uh the 500 plus thousand is actual uh contingency, like we do with most uh design contracts or construction contracts.

It will allow us to work more efficiently.

Should the scope change that has a justified uh additional costs, we could increase the contract up to that additional amount uh without having come to come back to council.

Thank you.

And um uh director McKee says you mentioned at the end of your comment that um we received federal funding and ACTC funding to be able to do the design process, which sets us up to be able to go back to both federal funding opportunities as well as ACTC, give it ACTC's emphasis on uh bedpike uh pedestrian bicycle safety as a as a very high priority.

Is that correct?

Correct.

Any further questions?

Okay, seeing none, then let's proceed to a vote on the motion by council member Victor Aguilar with a second from was it councilmember Bowen?

Yes, yes, thank you.

All votes are in.

And the motion carries unanimously with six yes votes, and council member Simon being absent.

At this point in time, we will take up item five E.

This item was pulled by council member bolt.

Councilmember Bolt, I would ask for you to um lead the first step of this discussion.

We'll see where the discussion goes.

Casa Peralta, there you go.

Thank you.

Proceed.

Yes, thank you.

I pulled five E.

Um to express that that dollar amount feels extremely high.

Uh I was in the meeting that we actually had for facilities.

It was a great day out there at Casa Peralta.

There was some discussion about a community group giving us some money to update an older uh scope for design, and that amount uh was researched and thought about by them.

And that was as mentioned $20,000, and now we're at over half a million five hundred sixty-six thousand five hundred and ninety-six.

I feel like as the city manager has said before, um you know, things change in the and the thought that the amount of money we're looking to cut and do things with in our city.

For me, just to upgrade a 10-year-old study of the house can raise that much.

I I am not comfortable with that.

Um I cannot vote yes on that, so I pulled it.

But the idea of it coming back to facilities and us reviewing some of the options that were there.

And uh the thought that it goes into a park.

I don't think anybody wants that, but it's an option, right?

And and we have to discuss it.

I don't want that to happen.

I'd like to see Casa Peralta saved, but I think we need to send it back to facilities to have a real meaningful discussion.

Uh it's been 14 months, we haven't proceeded uh in any of the upgrades to this point, and and I don't, I'm not comfortable with us saying yes to this, so I pulled it.

And um, I would like to send it back to facilities for us to reevaluate where we're at as a city, what what kind of funds uh we have.

Um, because I'm afraid that even if we were to approve this, which I don't support, it gives an unrealistic expectation that somehow we're gonna find some more money to actually do the things that this report asks us to do.

Um if it's this number, I can only imagine what the actual repair costs are gonna be.

And I don't want to give an unrealistic expectation of our community that okay, here we go, we're walking down this path.

Now we're gonna spend this money, and then the next thing we're gonna do is fix it once we get that's not the case.

So again, I would like to see us bring it back.

I don't know if that's uh motion needed or how you want to.

So why don't we do this before I take a motion?

Let me just share very quickly if there's any other concerns, because I'm I'm taking what you say as a motion that you would like to be the motion maker.

I'm fine with that.

But if there's any other elaborations, such as potentially uh, well, let's go to you, Vice Mayor, and see where this takes us.

Thank you.

Uh I also have a concern, particularly around um what is the difference between the tenure report and what is the kind of added value.

And I I would um question that that actually that that Delta is actually worth 560 plus thousand.

Um I I am supportive of sending it back to facilities.

Um I think um this is a community asset that um is consistently uh for those of us who are newer to San Leandro and were able to experience it for just a little tiny bit.

It it is a truly beautiful magical place.

Um and I only had the uh privilege of walking and being in that space um for the first couple of years that I was um living in San Leandro and now it's not open to the public.

So um I would like to explore all the options to have an informed discussion about the trade-offs and what we're investing in and what we choose not to for it to be a transparent process.

Uh and I um I would second that motion to send that back to facilities to have um that cohort of that committee of the council really vet through all of the options and and and and have that discussion.

I don't feel comfortable with um spending that amount of money on the updating a plan that is 10 years old.

Okay.

So just to be really clear, we don't have a motion yet, but I hear you clarifying the scope of what that motion would look like, namely that we consider all options that it's not just limited to something about this specific study, but what are the options for Casa Peralta?

I'm coming to Council More Bowen next.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um I would love to hear from our director um to kind of give some clarity around what that consulting service uh and that amount of 566, what that scope actually looks like to understand what is being done if it's some like if there is a gap between what was done um 10 years ago versus now, um and just so that I understand better.

Certainly, uh Brian Simons, library director.

Um good evening, uh mayor uh counsel.

Um so the scope of of what's being proposed, uh we need to take a little bit of a step back to that evening when we uh discussed it at the facilities committee.

And one of the things that uh we were instructed to do is to uh investigate what it would cost, like get an up-to-date cost.

We had used uh industry standard uh inflationary escalators, but they're all you know, giving a near-ish.

We had we used three of them.

Uh we used they they got approximately a similar cost, around 10 million for hard cost, and then um it was also estimated to be about five more million on top of that to renovate for uh soft costs.

Um but in that 10 years' time, and this is why we were instructed to go that route is to look at something uh new, is in 10 years' time a lot more degradation had happened.

Um our chief building official had gone through it and um he noticed more rot, more uh sinking of the the floors.

Um so we were in a place where more damage has already happened to it.

So to just use escalators probably was not going to be accurate.

So in order to get a real accurate price, and the direction at the time was to not leave a stone unturned to make sure if we were to go down this path to know as best to as best we could with whatever was available at our disposal to get an estimate for to make sure we're not surprised later on as we get into the the construction of it that let's say it just hypothetically it was going to be 15 million, and then we start tearing things apart and rebuilding, we discover something.

Oh, now there's another two million, five million, what have you.

We wanted to do our best effort possible and do everything we could to not only redo what was done, but then add those three elements to dig as deep as we could to make sure we weren't surprised by a bid later on to then have to come back and say, well, we know we said it was 15 million, but now we're running into more problems and there's you know more millions we need to put into this.

So we're trying to we were trying to stem that off at the beginning.

Understood.

And is the cuss I'm I'm trying to think back to our um our capital improvement plan of projects that we're committed to uh working on the Casa Peralta is included in that correct?

Um anybody that can answer that for me, Chair.

Hi, good evening, uh Councilmember J City Mai, City Engineer.

Uh the funds to fund this study are currently within this uh capital improvement project.

Uh plan, I'm sorry.

Uh can you clarify?

What do you mean uh is everybody included as in it has already been allocated to that specifically?

It was allocated to the Casa Peralta project in general.

There was money uh still in that account when this decision was made.

So we uh earmarked uh a portion of that money to go to the study.

Got it.

So we had sp we had specifically earmarked sun funds to go towards Casa Peralta.

That does not necessarily mean that are the that is the only, those are the only funds that we could or would spend towards Casa Peralta.

That's correct.

Okay.

Um and um and also the question of potentially giving Casa Peralta to a nonprofit.

Um is that what is what would that process actually look like?

Um if if anybody could just clarify that.

Uh I can clarify uh to some degree.

Um what we know is it's a little complicated because the gift grant deed where when we got the property in 1971 is very specific um and it has some specific requirements that uh the city is is required to operate under uh uh we have to keep it as a uh element of historic uh significance um and uh it can be used for art or and and history.

There has to be an element of history involved.

Um what in order to move it on to another or even for us to do something else with it, the first thing we would have to do is offer it back to the donating family.

And then they would have to either decide to take it back or they would have to um uh decide that they didn't want that and relinquish that um offer back, and then that would open the door to potentially gifting it to someone else.

Um but that would be the first step.

Um so there would be some some legal uh actions that would need to take place.

Um, but that's the that's the gist of it.

And can I just take one more um minute to add something?

Um I I appreciate that clarity.

I I recognize that there seems to be a desire to go back to facilities, and if if facilities is interested in doing that, I I certainly welcome it.

I also appreciate understanding that um uh the amount that is that is that we're putting to it is actually had been has been allocated towards it.

And I I do I am really supportive of finding ways to be able to support the Casa Peralta.

I've actually held um an organized uh Easter egg hunts at the Casa Peralta for like hundreds of kids.

That was actually kind of overwhelming.

But uh, you know, and then also you know that we've done amazing projects there on the environment.

So I I really do I know that the community really does appreciate the space.

I also recognize that um uh that that hesitation to spend money when we may not be able to find more money in the short term for it, but if we do have the funds already available, I would like us to be able to work towards getting class of parallel to a place where it is restored.

Thank you, Councilmember Victor Aguilar.

Thank you, Mayor.

I'd like to make a motion to move item 5E to go back to um facilities committee for further discussion.

And would the scope of that referral include analysis of all possible disposition funding sources and the like the totality of the breadth of discussion?

Yes, okay.

Is there a second on Council Member's motion?

Councilmember Bolt.

Second.

Okay.

Um without going into a lot of detail.

I think that there's this house has significance for many reasons in addition to its historical uh significance to the city.

I don't want to get into those things right now because we do have a motion that I support along with a second.

Look forward to a robust discussion in facilities.

Signal further discussion, please vote on a motion to move this to facilities.

Yes means take it to facilities.

All votes are in, and the motion carries unanimously with six yes votes, and council member Simon being absent.

Okay, at this point in time, we will take up five G.

Um I polled it, but Vice Mayor, would you like to lead the discussion on 5G, the ACTC proposed CIP.

Vice Mayor.

I think you I would just like to start off with um a little bit of exploration and um some wonderings that I have in terms of just refreshing my memory on the process by which we decide what to submit applications for.

Please.

That's the question.

Okay.

So we will go to uh director Marquises.

There you are.

If you could please proceed.

Good evening, Sheila Marquises, public works director.

So for projects like uh projects submitted to Alameda CTC, um, we we the staff um look at the most competitive projects um after reviewing Alameda CTC's um notice of funding opportunity.

We review these uh the various categories that uh they put forth and we look at our projects that are a highest priority.

And when I refer to um highest priority, I'm referring to our master plan.

So we have a bicycle and pedestrian master plan, um, local roadway safety plan, um, any other site-specific plans.

So when we look at those plans and projects that we already have um supporting documents for, so the good example is the crosstown corridor.

We already have a lot of momentum.

Um so we look at the various projects and we make a uh staff analysis of which is gonna be the most competitive.

Um so for if my may get into the current um ACTC funding opportunities.

So for example, they'll um put forth eligible project categories.

So for this year's funding opportunity, they list six eligible categories, and so that's our first pass of which projects that we have in the pipeline that would be eligible for these projects.

And so kind of fast forward once staff has identified those projects.

We um come to council with the uh request to support these projects, and then we're also working on the grant applications in the background.

I'm gonna look to our city engineer if there's anything else he wants to add.

Um no, I should just add uh so the the release for the uh call for projects was at the end of May, May 28th, and actually the first workshop for uh the grant was in the beginning of June.

Um and then applications were due at the end of this month in one week.

So it's a very quick turnaround.

Uh so staff had the charge of doing a very um quick assessment to determine which projects best um were most competitive based on the uh criteria um set by the Alameda County Transportation Commission.

Thank you.

Inadvertently turned off my mic.

Um so just to be clear, um the council as a body.

This is the first time we've seen the request to submit grant applications to the Transportation Commission, the county's transportation commission.

So we are and they're due at the end of this month.

They're due in one week.

Um so just as a are we just doing questions or are we rolling them both?

Just proceed.

Okay.

Um so just in in terms of um the uh what we submit application, and what is the total amount that we're what are the projects?

I didn't, I don't I pulled up the CIP process, the CIP project, and I know I don't have the um amounts, but what is the total well what would be the total grant amount should we be successful in getting all these applications?

If I may just read that for each project, so we have about requested 3.7 million uh for the uh the rescue project, 863,000 for the East 14th North Area Pedestrian Lighting Project, 1.394 million for the Fairway Drive Traffic Calming Project, and 495,000 for the safe routes to school pedestrian safety enhancements project.

Okay.

I think just in terms of um what are the types of projects that go forth for submittal, just in terms of our role and the kind of oversight and um I I would like to have at least have like the menu or the universe of projects that are up for um analysis to just kind of understand what is the universe of projects that staff is thinking about submitting for the county commission for possible funding.

I I would say just in in terms of timing, I'm just a um, you know, uh we're a week out or 10 days out from the deadline.

Um, and I definitely don't want to kind of put the brakes on any of these very important projects throughout the city.

Um but the process by which the the projects that are eligible, it seems a little unclear to me.

Uh, but maybe it's you know, I'm I'm not on facilities, I'm not on ACTC.

Um so as a member of this council, I just felt a little bit like in the dark about what were the pro what even what was even being considered for analysis and what projects didn't make the cut.

Um, because I it as our uh anyway, so I'll I'll just leave that there.

Um we're I'll leave I'll I don't have any time to seat back.

So uh those are all my comments.

No worries coming to Council Mara Bowen.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um a few questions.

So I'm looking at the different projects that we were submitting to and um submitting and uh for uh 14th Street North Area pedestrian lighting, fairway drive traffic calming and safe routes to school pedestrian safety enhancement projects.

Um that makes sense to me in terms of bike pad safety again, which I'd mentioned earlier is a priority for ACTC.

Can you share a little bit about the regional emergency stabilization for coastal utility and egress and why that is a competitive um application?

Hi, I can take that uh JCD my city engineer.

Uh so the per the um Alameda County Transportation Commission guidelines, uh they have 200 million dollars, but there are several different different pots of money that make up that 200,000.

Specifically, there is a program category called three major trails, and those three one of those three major trails is the Bay Trail.

So 15 million dollars of that 200 million dollars is available specifically for the major trails uh program.

And uh we felt that that the rescue project would would compete uh favorably and actually pretty strongly uh for that money that's available.

Thank you.

Um and then the other um clarifying question that I had, and I mean I I do sit on ACCT ACTC for Supervisor TAM, and I also sit on the public policy uh the um the policy committee, which actually approves the uh their CIP plan that then goes to the full board.

I do actually remember in May when we approved it to go out for bids, um bringing it as public comment for the council as well, and I think you know, encouraging staff to continue the work to fund these these projects.

Um I wanted to dig a little bit deeper um with you, uh uh, Director Murke says about that um process for picking the projects.

So um we have our um we have our CIP plan too.

I get all my acronyms mixed up.

We have the plan that we say these are our priority projects.

Then we have our master plans, like local roadway safety, we have Vision Zero, for example, um, and then you have to overlay that on top of the eligible project categories, bicycle and or pedestrian capital projects and programs.

So specifically for bike and ped, complete streets capital and road improvement projects.

So our our Crosstown Corridors project is a good example.

I think Dr.

Keys is you've actually been pulled into ACTC meetings for all of us to give a presentation on it because people are so excited about that project, which is why they were so willing to fund that.

Transit related capital projects, so like the East Bay Greenway project, so that we have no not that one.

But then shuttle and other program operations and technology projects.

So that specifically are the eligible project categories, and that's why these particular projects are on there.

Did I miss anything?

No, you've got that right correct.

Okay.

Thank you.

So I'm just gonna clarify before going to Councilmember Regular.

So we've got major trails at 15 million.

Do you have the funding for the other categories, Handy?

Yes.

If you could proceed, please.

For the bicycle and pedestrian program, there's 31 million transit program, 21 million.

Community and transit oriented development, 35 million.

Technology program, 20 million, freight and economic, 10 million, three major trails was the 15 million, then multiple program eligibilities, um, which includes toll revenues, um, fund for clean air, one Bay Area Grant program, and community action and resource resource and empowerment is 68 million.

68.

68.

Thank you.

Councilman Ray Lar, coming to you.

Victor Aguilar.

Thank you, Mayor.

I'd like to move item 5G.

Uh since I have not made my comments yet, I'm gonna I'm gonna ask it to pause before accepting your motion.

Um so there have been a lot of discussions.

Uh I represent the city of San Leandro on ACTC.

And there have been discussions with ACTC about ways to bring funding specifically to Lake Shabot Road.

That was a meeting with um supervisors, county supervisors, uh folks from Bay of Vista and others around methods to get funding and exploring that funding.

I've had individual conversations with the executive director.

And the reason that I'm struggling uh because our vice mayor has said that she doesn't want to stop this, but at the same time, I think there's a certain angst there because if there were an opportunity to receive funding for Lake Shebo Road, it seems like our efforts to pursue that.

Um there's no opportunity in this as we continue to have those discussions uh at the I'll call it at the political level on behalf of the city.

And so what I'd like to see is an expansion of this list for I don't have a better term than placeholder, that if we were able to get some um indications from ACTC with respect to the viability of a Lake Chabot Road investment at this time, with a full recognition that uh their priorities keep evolving and the like.

And that effectively says funding to support this the stabilization of Lake Shabot Road with a focus on slides two and three.

I know that we've got historical uh design.

I my recollection is that we do have a 100% design.

There has been some additional slippage, and we might need to update that.

Um so funding for updated design.

Um I'd work with staff on getting the the best language, but all I'm looking for is uh counsel for council support to have a placeholder with the recognition that it might not work out, but that we at least have the option to explore.

And if ACTC says no, that's that's really not going to work, it's not viable.

Um that's okay.

I mean, we only have seven days.

I think the the date is seven days, not ten.

That's correct, right?

So um so with that in mind, I I want to come back to Vice Mayor because I knew you had this this thing in mind that you were trying to verbalize, and I don't know if I have captured it or not.

And then I will proceed with other other council members and then we'll look for a motion.

Uh yes, Vice Mayor.

Uh yes, I I I don't want to pool a list of projects that we have.

These are all very worthy and important projects.

Um, but I'll leave that there and then I'll because you asked me a specific question and a colleague clocked in before I did.

So I'll log off and then cut get back on the queue.

Okay.

Uh councilmember Bowen.

Uh um it's it's fine.

I um I was trying to explore um given the um given the uh what sorry, I gotta pull this up.

Um the categories and the priority areas and the the criteria for the projects.

Um the MacArthur roundabout is a very good example of a project that um ACE uh ACTC would fund and has been part of the conversation.

We've actually um we as an ACTC has um actually launched a program called CRISP, which is specifically focused on those sort of um right away or those areas around ramps to make sure that they can be safer.

And so I was trying to figure out if we have had past funding in the past for ACTC, or if there would be a potential to get more funding from ACTC so that we could take those funds from the general fund that we have allocated for um the Begatha Roundabout and then use it for other projects.

I can uh do a quick answer.

So we uh MacArthur Boulevard uh roundabout was uh certainly considered for this round.

However, the the funding for this uh capital improvement uh program for ACTC is going to be available in 2028, and that is after we are hopeful that the construction of the roundabout is going to start.

So the the funding would be uh available too late uh for us to use.

Okay, great.

Thank you so much.

And I love that we've affirmed that we are going to get it done, maybe even sooner.

Okay, Vice Mayor, please.

Um I mean, certainly I, you know, this is just grant, these are not just grant applications, but these are grant applications that um will be submitting, and I understand that adding a fifth one would add um, you know, an additional application.

Um Mayor, and I just wanted to clarify, are you proposing that we direct staff to have conversations with ACTC about the viability of that before we submit an application?

I'm just worried about the timing.

So the timing would consist of, you know, it it is my personal intention to speak with ACTC executive director tomorrow.

Okay.

Because I do want to understand just what is the re the is it realistic, is it aligned with what they're doing right now?

Because if it's not aligned, I really don't want to submit something that's going to take the place of another project.

It's very important to me that we not be um uh pursue the wrong opportunity.

Right.

And so that's that's something I want to be mindful of.

But the problem is as written, there is no opportunity to explore.

And so that's why I'm saying it would be nice if the motion uh left open that possibility.

And I fully cognizant that there are seven days, and so the most that it could ever take is six to write the application.

But first, let's find out.

And without that ability, without that opening, it obviates the need for a conversation.

Thank you.

And uh I I appreciate I think this is one of our um this to me shows two things.

One, um, how we can support each other in terms of where the various uh committees that we sit on and um you know bring that back to the council.

And I I know councilmember Bowen um mentioned it um at the end of the council meeting where we provide reports, but I think one, this provides a learning opportunity.

I think for me to keep uh kind of a closer eye on these reports, because I think um it it might have just like slipped, but second, I I appreciate Mayor Umsing your position at ACTC representing Sal Leandro and kind of utilizing that uh positionality to explore whether this is even a feasible thing, even if it is a uh a reach, and I understand um that it will put, you know, if if if there is even uh if it if the director's executive director expresses some sort of like it could be, um I I certainly don't want to put other projects at risk that where we know that the analysis shows that we have a higher incidence of uh getting it approved.

So uh what appreciate mayor for uh uh utilizing that's the whole reason why you probably you know sit on that commission to represent us and advocate for that, um, but also just as a learning opportunity to make sure that um as these funding opportunities come up in the committees that we're all sitting in that we elevate it in in in a way that it kind of raises the consciousness of like okay, grant applications are coming up for BCDC or MTC or you know, and and kind of understand um have a better understanding of the all the the intersection of all those committees that we sit in.

Thank you.

Okay, councilmember you let and then council member bowen in that order.

Thank you, Mayor Gonzalez.

I like to again move item 5G to include um possibilities to figure out if we if there is potential to build an application to fund Lake Chabot Road and to have the conversation with Tony Javares from ACTC.

Um that's my my motion.

Thank you.

Okay.

One moment, please.

And can you I think add into that motion the recognition that we do not want to put the existing grant opportunities at risk?

Yes.

Okay, thank you for that clarification.

Councilmember Bowen, please.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I just had uh follow question um that I just remembered.

Um I know that the for each project submission there are uh award minimum requests and maximum requests and then the minimum matches for them.

I can't remember, Mayor, if if you might know or if um Director Marquises for ACTC umst the 14 jurisdictions, uh is there a cap on how much we can be awarded per jurisdiction, or they can just give Tammy under all of all of the money.

There's no cap per jurisdiction.

Okay, there is a cap of 10 million dollars per project.

Okay, thank you.

And then Vice Mayor, you set you had been in there a little bit, but you're set.

Okay, so I will go ahead and second the motion made by council member Victor Aguilar.

Seeing no further discussion, please vote.

All votes are in, and the motion carries unanimously with six yes votes in council member Simon being absent.

Okay, at this point in time, we do not have any city attorney or city manager reports.

Uh public comment.

We will take public comment on items that are not listed on our agenda today, but are within the subject matter jurisdiction of this council.

How many cards do we have, Madam Clerk?

Mayor, we have not received any comment cards for this item.

Okay, so we'll close public comment in person.

Do we have any hands online?

Yes, we have three hands raised online.

Okay, please proceed.

We open public comment online.

Our first online speaker is named Celia Esposito Noi.

Good evening, Mayor and City Council members.

Uh, my name is Celia Esposito Noy.

I am speaking on behalf of uh our family and homeowners in the uh Fulton Avenue area next to Assumption Church.

Uh, as you may have heard, there is a vacant lot there that is owned by PGE.

It is unfenced, and for quite some time now, there have been homeless encampments there.

Uh both Assumption Church and neighbors along Fulton Avenue have been documenting the frequency in which the homeless encampment has uh been established there, uh, threats to the neighborhood, uh, possible break-ins to the church.

And we certainly understand while this is not the city's responsibility, we are asking for assistance from the um mayor from staff uh regarding connecting with PGE.

This property has been unfenced for well over 60 years.

And the fact that there is plenty of room for fencing and access for those who have an easement agreement with PGE.

Uh, they have never fenced this property, and it's become more and more dangerous.

So I'm asking if staff could work with me and the other neighbors on Fulton Avenue to see if we can pressure PGE to attend to this issue and at least fence off their property.

Thank you.

Thank you.

The next online speaker is Douglas Spaulding.

Thank you very much.

Um a little popourie here.

First, I I want to give a shout out to uh to Brian Copeland.

I think a lot of people are very happy.

Thank you so much, Brian, for uh yet another incredible edition of comedy in the plaza.

Um, you know, I uh he looks remarkable.

Although I will say I I did try to give him a chest bump and for some reason he ran away.

If I wasn't laughing, I'd be crying.

Um, I do not think there's enough time for the um uh the hazard mitigation plan, uh, which is closing on uh um this Friday.

Uh I don't know why you don't widen the window, and also why you're not taking public comments on this.

It seems like a very important issue that touches on many things from not just wildfires, but uh what about earthquakes and what we learned from the Wigo presentation is we don't even know where to go to if there's an evacuation.

So it seems like there's a lot a lot of work to be done.

Uh third up, I want I want to say I want to thank the uh SLPD for releasing the video in the critical incident report from uh from May 7th.

Uh, and thank you, Mike Katzakov for uh pointing out it was way overdue.

Um, I did watch the video.

It's difficult to watch, but I I want to send a compliment, especially to Officer Q in particular for his calm demeanor and de-escalation techniques.

I I thought that the team as a whole worked together very well up to the moment of the shooting.

Uh, you know, and then we need more information.

Um so you know, when and where did the gun appear and was it appointed officers and you know, our use of force uh things.

This this seems very analogous to the the 2019 incident, which involved Anthony Gomez.

Uh, you know, in a suicide by cop kind of scenario.

Uh and finally in 10 seconds, I want to say, hey, we we say learn, we have a data center debate.

Uh make no doubts about it.

Uh currently the mayor and at least one of the city council persons are in favor.

Thank you, sir.

Your time has elapsed.

Our next online speaker is Christopher Bammer.

Hello, can you hear me?

Yes.

Um, I've been called a lot of things in my lifetime, uh, but not a uh professional anything.

I'm not claiming to be a professional, but I do know when you build something, you gotta have a good foundation.

And once it's built, you gotta have a good roof.

Two things that the Casa Peralta needs very badly foundation and a roof.

So just those two costs alone are gonna be probably over 10 million dollars.

You guys are worried about the windows and this, that, and the other thing.

Why don't we use this property to make some money?

Why don't we do a long-term lease and have a restaurant buy it?

And they can use some of the special tiles and some of the special features and things from the house in the design of a new restaurant.

And then you can make the waiting area and all throughout the restaurant history of the Casa Peralta, and we can get some tax revenue and we can have a long-term lease, and maybe that'll help out somebody, you know, that's possibly down in the marina, which is falling apart and it looks like a dump site.

Um just some thoughts.

Um, I would like to see a complete and thorough uh reconciliation of the bank account for the Casa Peralta.

Uh let's just say from 2016 till now.

I'd like to see the ins and outs of the money, where it went, why it went, things like that.

Um the bus stops around the greenhouse.

I mean, I've I've spoken about the greenhouse for years.

Um now that we've got this brand new navigation center that we spent way too much money for, and we're helping, you know, a couple dozen people.

There's a lot of loitering going on.

The bus stop in front of Food Max, the bus stop in front of the old Goodwill, the old Goodwill building.

I mean, that's been a discussion for years too, and it looks great.

They just took the bus stop out in front of McDonald's on like Friday.

I drove by this morning, and now the new bench is already knocked over.

My daughter's got to use that bus stop to get to school.

And it's not a very safe area right there.

Can we do something about the greenhouse?

Maybe.

Thank you.

Mayor, there are no more hands raised online.

Thank you.

So at this point, we'll close online public comment.

Please give me one minute.

Okay, at this point in time, um we will move on to our next item on the agenda.

We do have a public hearing regarding some 2026 liens for non-payment for various charges.

And I think we do have our assistant finance director, if I remember correctly.

Felicia Silva here to present this item.

Thank you for joining us.

Felicia Silva, assistant finance director.

Um Mayor Gonzalez uh and uh Vice Mayor Vivero Swelton.

Um here to present the City of San Leandro annual liens um for 26-27.

So the San Leandro Municipal Code allows us to collect certain delinquent fees through an assessment lien on the property tax bill bill.

These are primarily related to public health and safety, um, and allows the city to ensure fiscal sustainability.

Charges subject to assessment lien um include sidewalk and driveway repair, code enforcement and compliance, solid waste through ACI or Alameda County Industries, um, fire inspections, um, Coupa, which is our certified unified program agency, and uh wastewater charges for commercial users.

The typical process that the lien um will follow is we start with an initial billing for um services that um the departments uh work with uh the customers and it will be through um either issuing a citation or through um a service provided.

Um an invoice is sent by finance, and then both um program staff as well as finance work with customers to um answer any questions on the billing as well as to provide potential payment options.

Uh we do everything in our power to uh work with our um customers to make sure that they um have every opportunity to pay before we start the lien process.

Um following that, we do have monthly statements.

Statements are sent monthly.

Um, and uh again working with the departments uh to make sure that they're um given every opportunity to pay.

We have um some legal notice requirements.

Um it is required that that we um publish in our local paper, and we did that on uh July 3rd and July 10th.

We um also in order to reach more um uh potentially affected, we did uh an additional and uh on July uh 17th.

So in addition to those published legal notices, we also do send uh three notices of intent um starting in May, June, and July.

Uh and in July, they also get uh information regarding um uh the public hearing details.

Um after the legal noticing, we have our public hearing, and of course that's where we are um today.

And um after we have our public hearing today, then we will um go through the um collection process again, giving um all of our customers every opportunity to pay anything that is outstanding um at the end of um July, right before we need to submit um to the county in August.

Um any of those potential property owners uh will be taken off the lien list.

Uh with that, I want to point you to a three-year lien summary.

We have um three years of history.

I want to call your attention to twist 2627.

We have a count of 257 um accounts that will be assessed, and then uh at 753,000.

Again, an important footnote at the bottom that these amounts reflect balances as of July uh 9th, 2026.

Again, uh those ongoing efforts to collect before um any account is sent um to the county for a lien assessment, and uh we have been continuing to do that.

We'll continue to do that all the way through um that August submission to the county.

Our recommendation today is for city council to take the following actions: close the public hearing, adopt resolution to impose liens for non-payment, and adopt resolution to overroll protests.

And happy to answer any questions.

Okay, so prior to opening up the public hearing, I will see if there are any questions from council members.

Okay, seeing none, the time is 8:32, 832, and I am opening the public hearing.

We have members from the public who are commenting at this hearing.

Mayor, we've not received any comment cards from here in the room, but we do have one hand raised online.

Okay, please proceed online.

The first online speaker is Douglas Spaulding.

Uh thank you very much.

I I just would like to clarify I didn't hear it in your presentation, so I hope it's not true.

But um, you know, if someone has uh overdue parking tickets, is that something that that the city might place a lien on?

Uh I tried calling the citation processing center, but you can't get a hold of anyone.

So I I would have asked a question there.

Uh I kind of need to clear my tickets.

I need an abstract so I can take the DMV so I can register my car, but there's no way to do that either.

So, you know, here's another uh CSA.

I guess we hired somebody to do our parking for us way down in the Southland.

If you don't pay, well, you're you're you're out of luck.

That's uh that's what that's what stands for due to process these days.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Mayor, there are no more hands raised online.

Okay, the time is 8:34, and I'm closing the public hearing.

I do have a question to follow up on our public commenter.

Are parking tickets part of this lien process?

No, they are not.

Okay, thank you for the clarification.

Is there any further discussion from council members?

If not, I will entertain to adopt staff's three recommendations.

Councilmember Victor Aguilar.

Like to make the motion to adopt Staff's recommendation.

Vice Mayor.

I second.

Okay, so we have a motion from Councilmember Victor Aguilar to adopt staff's three recommendations with a second from our vice from our vice mayor.

Uh seeing no further discussion, please vote.

All votes are in, and the motion carries unanimously with six yes votes and councilmember Simon being absent.

Okay, at this point in time, we do not have a presentation item number nine, item number 10.

Is a motion to appoint David Jackson 10A to be precise, motion to point David Jackson to the committee police review board.

Um do we I don't know that we really need a presentation, so to speak.

Okay.

So uh are there any questions about this item on this item because we already had public hearing on the nomination.

Do we need do we need uh public comment on this item?

Could be we handle this sort of minute order that we don't we normally do not, okay, because people have spoken at the nomination period.

Okay, so with that being said, I wouldn't move because he is my pointy, I will move the appointment of David Jackson to the CPRB.

Uh Vice Mayor.

Second.

Okay.

Having a motion and a second for the appointment of David Jackson and the community police review board.

And no further discussion, please vote.

The motion carries unanimously with all members voting yes, and council member Simon being absent.

Okay.

Thank you.

At this point, we've got item 10B.

10B is um a second reading of the ordinance.

Uh, as you will may recall last time I voted no, because I wanted a little bit further discussion on this item specifically.

So if we can proceed uh with your presentation, planning manager Lee.

Good evening, America Gonzalez, members of the city council.

My name is Waylon Lee, Planning Manager for the city.

The item before you is the second reading adoption of an ordinance amending the city's off-street parking regulations and establishing new transportation demand management or TDM requirements on new development.

The council introduced this ordinance on July 6th by a vote of four to one, with two council members absent.

What does the ordinance do?

The ordinance has two primary components.

First, it repeals and replaces zoning code chapter 4.08, which is the chapter of the zoning ordinance which regulates off-street parking requirements for new development.

The amendments serve to simplify our existing parking requirements.

They update minimum parking standards to better match actual demand.

They modernize bicycle parking standards, and it requires unbundling of parking for housing projects of five or more units.

For clarification, it does not change parking standards for single-family homes.

Second, the ordinance adopts a new zoning code chapter to add transportation demand require transportation demand management requirements on new development.

And this complements the parking updates by encouraging a reduction in vehicle trips and the demand for parking generated by new development.

First, it supports the city's climate action plan by reducing vehicle mile traveled and greenhouse gas emissions through the um through the new TDM program.

Second, the city's housing element identified minimum parking requirements as a constraint to as constraint to new housing production, and then identified that applications for parking reductions add time cost and uncertainty to development review.

And third, new state law now dictates where and how cities may impose parking requirements.

And this ordinance brings San Leandro into alignment with those state laws.

This concludes my presentation.

Available answering questions that the council may have.

Do we have any questions?

Okay, so I will begin chapter 410, the Transportation Demand Management Plan.

There's a mandatory provision for all projects to have bicycle repair stations.

Tell me a little bit more about that, how that would work as a practical matter for let's say I redo the strip mall.

Tear it down, rebuild it on East 14th.

What how does that work?

Who gets that that station?

It's a separate bay in the strip mall.

Um that's that's a that's a good question.

Actually, the and to to summarize the transportation demand management uh regulations has um some mandatory components and some optional components.

Originally when they brought the item forward to the planning commission, the uh bicycle repair station was an optional element.

And in discussion with the planning commission, they felt that um it was such a low-hanging fruit that um it required so little um uh so little capital costs and operating expenses that it should really just be a mandatory measure that all new commercial and residential development um um undertake.

So it wouldn't be it would it wouldn't in practice it wouldn't be a large like physical commitment in terms of space towards the station, but it'd be it'd be the um it would just house some basic equipment to uh conduct the repairs.

So every new building built in the city of San Leandro will have a bicycle repair station.

Uh every new building that meets the minimum thresholds for uh triggering TDM requirements, which um uh I forget the square footage for a commercial development, um, but I can return that to you in just a moment.

But it's going to be in anything that's a material requires most significant.

The reason one of the things that really troubles me about this is that if we think about what we're trying to do with parking is have joint use of parking.

We're saying we need to have shared facilities.

And much in the same spirit, it strikes me that we shouldn't have every single new building within the parameters needs to have a bicycle repair station.

Seems like there's some economies of scale.

And that I just don't understand how that cost imposition on every building is a good thing, particularly commercial buildings.

We can argue about residential buildings.

Should every residential building have a car repair location or a bicycle repair location, or any variety of transportation repair locations.

Um, because people live there, that's where they're gonna have their vehicles, their bikes, et cetera.

But to say every new building of any real size needs to have one.

I'm I'm really struggling with.

Can you explain the motivation other than oh, well, it's why not have it as opposed to there's a logic why every new building should have it?

Right.

The um I'll say that our our TDM consultant for the projects evaluated a menu of different options for um for mandatory and um optional TDM elements.

And they're selected because they actually move the needle in terms of uh reducing the uh reducing vehicle trips, reducing the um the demand for um demand for parking over overall.

Um and it was and through the public process, it was important for um it was conveyed through this the stakeholder sessions, it was important to have um to not be an impediment to to development.

So um the the option the the um the mandatory measures that were recommended or ones that um uh staff evaluated and our consultants evaluated for um kind of reasonability in imposing on um on new development without being um without being a barrier to development of um of um in this case commercial development may I add through the mayor?

Um there is a good faith effort clause so that if in uh the determination of the zoning enforcement official a applicant has made a good faith effort to comply and it doesn't make sense given there are certain parameters, uh the zoning enforcement official can um can waive something if it's infeasible.

Um just so to provide a we do like to provide a bit of discretion because not every situation is alike.

And then they think the threshold you were looking for, Wayland was the 50,000 square foot buildings.

That's right.

Yeah.

So larger projects.

Thank you.

So for example, could someone meet the requirement by having a bark a parking station, uh repair station just on the back, the loading gate area.

Absolutely.

It won't it won't have to take up a large space.

It definitely wouldn't take up a leasable tenant space.

Um and I think our our ordinance is meant to be like an introductory ordinance.

Some cities take TDM very seriously, they're very stringent requirements that are monitored and they're at quite a cost.

This is an introductory level where uh people make their best effort.

There are some mandatory and some optional items, but it's meant to still facilitate development, which is which is the primary goal here.

Thank you.

How good of uh Council Member Bowen, please.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um your your questions um brought up some things for me, and then I had an additional question.

Um I remember asking about um some of the options that developers could have.

And I remember the consultants saying that they were like low cost, like education, et cetera, for like um uh a bike repair, like could it be something as simple as like having like a pump available or you know, so that if you get a flat tire, you can fix it, but it's not like a full, like you can come here, it's a one-stop shop to fix your bike.

I I think the way you express it is correct.

It's it's the intention is to have that that those base the basic equipment to allow um uh residents or employees to um repair their bicycles so that they can get get to work, get to home, get to where they need to go.

Okay, great.

And then if we could just go to slide three um around um the policy direction and why we're doing this.

Um yes, that one.

I really really appreciate this, especially as we're talking to the work plan, like how do these things scaffold up?

Like this is directly it.

Um is our vision zero plan is that built, is that part of our 2021 climate action plan, or is that something separate that we could also I I think uh call out as policy direction?

I'm not to speak for other departments, but I think vision zero is more about safety, and there is some overlap.

The bicycle and pedestrian planning looks both at vision zero and climate goals.

And so that's the merging of the climate and the safety piece is the pedestrian bicycle master plan.

But for this particular item, I wouldn't say that it it is uh rooted in vision zero policy.

Okay, I was just thinking about the fact that we're trying to enable more people to use their bikes.

Yes.

And so I just part of like, how do we I guess you could because I guess vision is focused on safety for bicyclists.

Yes, got it.

Okay.

Um, that's if anonymous comments later.

So do you have one other question?

I know that um the parking minimums.

There's part of the work that uh results or that is being driven by compliance with state law.

And then there's a separate part, which is just our desire that's introduced, but it's not necessary for compliance with state law.

The concern that it expressed at the other meeting specifically focused on construction in parts of the city where street parking at night is already quite challenging.

And to say that we aren't introducing parking minimums, and some of those parking locations are residential.

Uh my concern was that residential neighborhoods could well be impacted in locations that already don't have enough parking through the introduction of construction that doesn't have parking minimums.

And it specifically said, well, can we impose an assurance that the people that don't have parking spaces will also not have cars?

So the question is two parts.

First, um when it comes to the residential impacts of the construction of those facilities that don't have parking minimums or have reduced parking minimums.

How are we taking the the externality, the impact on those neighbors?

How are we taking that into account?

Because it's it's to the benefit of the builder that it's to the detriment of the existing property owners.

So I'll just start with that one.

How do we take that into account?

Uh thank you, Mary.

Uh, and recognizing that there are residential neighborhoods in the city that um where there are existing parking problems.

Um I think the the updated parking standards, the attempt to right-size and calibrate the parking, the minimum parking minimums to the actual demand that's um uh that's established based based on the use.

Um, and that's based on peak demand.

So I think the intention of the ordinance is not to um is not to create standards that would in of themselves push the impact onto um to um uh um residential streets, but the um calibrated to what the actual anticipated demand of those of these of those uses are um in those neighborhoods.

In those neighborhoods, I'll also point out that in largely single family neighborhoods.

The um the ordinance doesn't, the ordinance that the revised parking requirements don't affect single family homes, so that so those standards would not change.

And the ordinance also replies prospectively to new developments.

So there'd be no obligation for there'd be no uh there'd be little effects on those existing existing streets that that cover your question.

If I build an apartment complex that has very little parking, and it's not near public transit.

I'm assuming that we recognize that people will then end up parking in the neighborhood streets near the building.

May I add to that, Whelan?

Yes.

Um I think one thing to be mindful of is that the standards are scaled based on um the uh number of bedrooms in each unit.

So there's not a one-size-fits-all parking standard.

Um larger units are required to provide under the ordinance more parking spaces.

Um but the feedback we received throughout many um professional analyses of our code was that we had very some, I would say like suburban, more old fashioned parking requirements that hadn't kept up with the times.

And so the two spaces per unit for the three bedrooms and the one space per unit for the studio and one bedrooms is meant to right size the parking requirement, not over park.

And so I think um you're absolutely correct.

We cannot cap how many cars people have, trends change with vehicle ownership.

In general, it's getting more expensive to own a vehicle, and there are more options like ride share and other things that make it you know easier, and then even with like autonomous vehicles, like I think there's a prediction that in the future there will be less vehicle ownership, but we're not we're not designing this code to that future.

We're designing it to what we understand the demand to be today from the professionals we hired.

Um, but I do just want to highlight that scaling because it is critical.

If you have a three-bedroom unit, one car is not likely to be enough, right?

Okay.

So I'll end with one last question.

And that's when I think about Central Cowan, um, I think about the fact that they are looking for additional parking.

When I think of 1388 Bancroft, it was going to be sufficient parking because the parking was going to be on the street.

And so I'm I'm struggling a bit outside of our high density network.

And I think the old map, I can't remember if it was the green zone down east 14th or if that was a blue.

But was one was one color and the other one was the other color.

I really don't have a problem with our high density focus East 14th.

But I am still struggling with outside of that.

Legally, we have to do East 14th.

Outside of that, we're choosing to do it.

And I just I mean I don't feel comfortable yet, but you probably have the votes.

Um I'm gonna go to public comment on this item.

Mayor, we have not received any comment cards on this item, and there are no hands raised online.

Okay, so we'll close public comment.

Uh any other thoughts, questions, comments?

Councilmember Bolt.

Yes, thank you.

Um I would like to thank uh councilmember Bowen, because those were my exact questions when you asked at the beginning of yours.

Um the only other part of that was I know there's a menu that the planning commission looks at and says, okay, this is less.

So there were some other things that were a little more, I'll just say maybe extringent or or cost prohibitive that they chose this one to be a part of the program.

So um I think it is the right approach.

Um I was gonna ask uh what does a typical uh uh bike shop look like in this scenario, and oftentimes it's just a room with like a bike stand and and uh their ability to change a tire, fix the chain.

It's not meant to overhaul a bike for for a long period, so it's a smaller space.

Um, and and that was captured in the comments, so I was just reiterating that uh anything my comments or anything we can do in the process to help us, you know garner more housing and development in our city is what we need to be looking at.

Um obviously bringing this up to the state codes is very important to us.

So I will be in favor of this, and I appreciate all the hard work you guys have done for this process.

Thank you.

Councilmember Bowen, please.

Yes, I just wanted to move the item.

And I love that policy direction is still up there because that's why.

Okay.

So then I allow for my comments.

So we have a motion from Council Member Bowen.

My quick comments are focusing on two things.

First, um I'm not convinced that the evidence points to the housing minimum is causing the lack of development or the parking minimums causing the lack of development in San Leandro in particular.

I think there's lots of other reasons why housing is not being built in San Landro, and this is not one of them.

I am also very concerned about the result on neighborhoods.

There are places where we have to make the change.

I'm totally fine with that, right?

We need to be compliant with state law, and that's good, and that's appropriate.

We have talked about driving development into the East 14th corridor.

And this achieves that goal to the extent that parking minimums are keeping housing from being built.

I look at Central Calum looking for more parking.

That's just an indication that no, they they need more parking than what we let them build parking with.

And I think that the same thing will happen at 1388.

Um so my approach and is very much focused on let's do what we have to do to be compliant, and let's focus on the other areas to make sure we understand the impacts to neighbors and to neighborhoods.

Uh, because I do not currently believe that that's the impediment to housing being built in the city of San Leandro.

Um so I I will not be supporting, but it's that piece.

I do support the densification along East 14th.

I've said that since I started on the council.

I do support the development of downtown and Bayfair, more housing, more housing, more housing.

Uh, but the way that we're approaching this as a bundle, I do not agree with.

Um I'll come back to someone for a second, please.

Councilmember Bolt.

Second.

Okay.

Any further discussion on this item?

Sing none, please vote.

All votes are in, and the motion carries with five yes votes, one no vote from Mayor Gonzalez, and one council member being absent.

Councilmember Simon.

Okay, at this point in time, we'll move to our next item, which is item 11.

We do not have any council requests to schedule agenda items.

And then we've got item 12, our reports.

Please proceed, council member Bowen.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, I just want to share something that is that um we had an extensive um uh presentation at our last stop waste meeting focused on um stop waste.

It was the stop waste campaign date up label update, and this is important and something that I have to get used to, and what other council members to uh be aware of as well.

Um, but the issue with date labels is there's a confusion over expiration date.

So if you ever buy food, it's like sell by date, best by date, use by date.

And what's happening because of that is over 20% of the food that we buy goes to waste, and we look at food waste and how much of uh uh detrimental harm that causes to the environment.

It's one of the one of the core um uh focus areas of stop waste.

And so California AB660, which was signed into law in 2024, becomes became effective July 1st, 2026.

And what AB660 did was to standardize food date labeling by requiring the use of best if used by for quality and use by for safety.

So there's no longer a sell by label, and that was purposely for that.

That was actually something between like the distributor and then like the grocery stores.

So that wasn't actually meant for consumers.

So that's something for us just to be more aware of for uh for food safety and then obviously talking about the environment.

Um the uh the other thing that I wanted to um uh highlight is that I had the opportunity to have a very busy um travel week, but I went to um the local progress um conference last week, and I just wanted to share a few things that were really um were highlighted as uh critical focus areas for electeds across the country.

But the conversation that we had, which we've talked about was really focused on affordability and how do cities work together, especially with um stakeholders in the community and in partnership with um the council and staff to figure out ways to identify what uh the causes of people um in terms of uh affordability and what we can do to move that along.

Um immigration we talked about, and then also mitigations around um like data centers and the questions around AI also was uh was uh a big focus area.

And then the one thing that I would have to say that the facilities, facilitators of a workshop that was one of the most popular said, you know, five years ago we never had to have this sort of workshop, but it was really around safety for elected officials, whether that was to do with um uh just the the state of political discourse and political violence and so harassment, threats, that um things of that nature.

And so that was a really interesting thing that I really appreciated.

Um, and then at AAPI lead, which is a the only national organization for local up to federal appointed and elected officials was this weekend, and the focus was on public-private partnerships, something that we've been talking about at this council, combat combating anti-Asian hate, um, civic innovation and AI, and then also being able to hear from um our highest ranking API elected ever, which was VP Kamala Harris, which was really wonderful and inspiring.

And then the last thing that I want to spylight and take um uh direction from council member James Aguilar, when he did the staff highlight, I want to say that I had a constituent reach out and talk tell me that there was like a stop sign that you know was faded and could could staff do anything about it.

And it was one of those situations where staff could, and we happened to have a stop sign and it was taken care of, and so I really appreciate like that promptness and then the work um that we had talked about at the last um work plan around the really collaborative effort that the departments have focused on um helping our unhoused and also public safety for our residents.

I had a situation that where I we learned of um of a potential public safety, a real public safety issue, and and staff were able to go out there with all of the different departments and find out that you know, here's how we can address how find starting to figure out how to address it, and that many of the folks were actually on the list to go to the navigation center.

So it means that there is this pipeline, and obviously we need more housing, but shout out to staff for being able to be really responsive and the best way to figure out a solution and move us forward.

Uh two announcements or one announcement and one um event that I attended that I I wanted to encourage uh my colleagues to explore a little bit.

One um uh wanted to alert the community and the council um that SLIA is looking for an executive director.

So um they're currently recruiting.

Um, and so if you have any candidates that you think might be a good fit, um all the information is on uh SLIA's website.

Um, and then the other event that I attended was on Saturday, June 27th at the San Leander Library.

Um the Bay of Vista uh homeowners association along with uh the mayor and uh supervisor Tam co-hosted a presentation on uh study that the community funded um through a UC Berkeley uh startup and accelerator that specializes in creating models of evacuation.

Um, and it was a really powerful presentation.

Um what I just want to elevate for for us to think about was um this is something that the community uh had voiced in terms of concern um and the data and the various scenarios um actually reflected that reality.

Um and it was uh a really powerful presentation.

And um I I know that the Bay of Vista uh neighborhood association, um, homeowners association has been reaching out to my colleagues to do like a mini version of that presentation.

Um I would really uh I would really want to ask you to consider that.

It is um it is done by folks who are experts in this, and it it is a really compelling and actually quite scary as a person who lives in that neighborhood, thinking about um just how much it matters if you evacuate between one minute to five minutes to 10 minutes and how long you wait and what that could mean um for for those folks.

So um just wanted to elevate that presentation and also my gratitude for those who organized it.

Um it was a really well-attended event.

And it was just enlightening, but also informative and also a little scary.

And those are all my comments.

Thank you.

Okay, so I'll wrap this up.

I also I think one of our commenters mentioned the Brian Copeland comedy in the plaza event.

Very well attended.

Um just a really good wholesome, lots of laughter, lots of smiles.

So thank you to Mr.

Copeland.

And he had a number of donors who donated in kind, and they raised enough money to provide 150 backpacks and new shoes to San Leandro or to folks that work in collaboration with Davis Street.

Um had the opportunity after that event to join the All-Star Game of the Women's Premier Basketball Association, uh, which is a developmental league.

There's hosting games here at the San Leandro High School Gym.

It is apparently the only league of its type working with professional players who are looking to get into the WNBA, who have come oftentimes out of college, many of whom get placed on international teams if they're not placed in the WNBA.

And so there's a lot of encouragement to uh just spread the word because they'll be playing here at the San Leandro High School gym uh over the next four weeks and spend some time with their founder today to explore ways in which we might promote this activity here.

I can tell you that from watching the game, extremely fast-paced.

I mean, it's professional quality basketball.

These are D1 players that are looking to make it into the pros.

So there is no uh uh there's no lack of activity energy uh on on the court.

Um join the California Hispanic Chamber of Commerce gathering uh in Oakland.

And it's always good to uh to represent the city of San Leandro by being present, uh meet with a number of business owners who are thinking about where they operate their businesses.

And so sometimes being present is a good thing, and I'll leave it at that.

Uh Friday also involved a visit to the Lawrence Berkeley Science Hall or Lawrence Berkeley National Labs.

Uh the Bay Area Council is very focused on making sure that electeds understand the cutting edge of technology that is being developed to these labs, finding ways to work with Activate, which is their um, I'll call it their accelerator to make sure that businesses find a home.

Um so I continue to encourage folks to make those connections with those startup companies as we look to expand business into San Leandro.

Grateful for Walmart for their kind of grand reopening after their remodel.

So much joy.

It was great to see so many employees.

I was astounded by the number of employees that received uh certificates for decades of service at this Walmart location.

Uh so that's pretty cool when you see that kind of commitment to an organization and the organization reciprocates.

There is an ask from the senior commission specifically, but I have heard this from other commissions and that that it's good for us to visit them from time to time.

Just drop in and see the work that they're doing, uh, because sometimes I think they feel a little bit forgotten.

And even though what they do percolates up to us to watch them in action, I think can provide them some satisfaction.

So that's it was a specific request to my council that I promised to bring back to uh to join uh meetings, but I'm extending it to all the commissions because I know the commissioners do work hard.

Um from ACTC uh projects committee.

One of the things I just want to highlight is that the East Brake Greenway has gone from idea to concept in in in motion to design.

It's now going to be built.

And so the contracts are have been let for contracts approved for the the San Leandro Boulevard portion of that.

And the next step of the the next construction contract letting will be for the East 14th portion of that.

So over the next three-ish years, maybe four-ish years, so we should expect uh the East Bay Greenway um to be realized.

I know that the original dream had been to put it along the railroad tracks.

Uh the it's not a decommissioned track line, but it's an inactive track line.

But as a practical matter, that could not become a reality.

And so there was a pivot, and we should see lots of activity here in San Leandro construction activity.

I do want to thank uh Senator Grayson for coming out to San Leandro and spending time in Lena Tam's office.

Uh, and in particular, uh just fielding questions, cold questions, just whatever they were, and and and addressing them head on and meeting with constituents about their concerns.

So I'll pause and come back to Councilman Bowen.

I don't do it on purpose.

I just remember something when you start talking mayor.

Um I did want to acknowledge, and I know that we can't do recognitions for everything, and there are many things you want to recognize, but July is also disability pride month, and one in four adults have a disability.

Um, and as somebody who has spent a lifetime trying to acknowledge and fight off shame around a disability, I just wanted to acknowledge that for folks.

Um, and uh appreciate that, and maybe at some point we can you know have it be a resolution part of our annual plan.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um the last thing that I will end with is that um I do want the residents to understand that this council is very focused on efficiency and keeping track of projects a lot, just just more focus on projects finishing on time and on budget.

Um I do want to specifically highlight the uh the very large scale project elevate, which has reached its first milestone, namely the payment of employees as part of the uh first bridge cycle.

We'll kind of keep working through, monitoring, making sure that all payments are processed correctly, but by by all accounts, we're off to a great start for a project that uh was delivered on time and on budget.

And I know there was uh an approval today and consent to just continue some work on it.

That's all been budgeted for, and it's on the timeline that was expected.

So I want the the community to understand that we are committed to on time, on budget, if not ahead of schedule delivery on our projects, and it's something that your council is paying a lot of attention to.

So, with that being said, the time is now 9 13, and we are adjourned.